Discussion in 'Videocards - AMD Radeon Drivers Section' started by Remedy, Jul 26, 2013.
Looks like Hilbert was wrong, being released shortly according to Roy
Maybe shortly to him doesn't mean a few hours Let's wait and see...
Hmm interesting. Then it seems like I will be choosing my refresh rate per-game based on how each performs, instead of just choosing the highest refresh rate and removing FPS cap.
No microstutter if you're maintaining FPS at the FPS cap, but the frame-pacing would help when you dip below that cap.
It would immensely help those who run high resolutions and Eyefinity as well, those who find themselves often at FPS below their refresh rates.
So I've been prepping a framepacing article for and with AMD's 13.8 B1 driver and they asked me to release the article once the driver does live on August 1st to give other editors a chance to test the driver as well.
I'm wrong how ?
I still don't get. This new drivers will improve in single-gpu something or not?
No. You might see improvement with single GPU setups once the GCN memory manager is updated.
Funny I remember AMD promising new driver "soon" when it was an issue 6 months ago.. Now there I hasn't seen a single comment about it.
As Roy tweeted they are releasing them shortly, unless hes wrong
What's with everybody talking about the GCN memory management? Did AMD even confirm that this is in the works?
this driver/thread is like the weather outside: Hot
:invasion: I can imagine so many waiting for these...
There were a number of issues. Direcxt11 performance on single and multi setups, memory management rewrite, and Crossfire microstutter improvement. Lots of well-informed people seem to think the first two have been resolved/implemented already.
Waiting for the nerd rage when people shouting they cannot notice a difference! (I will probably be one of them)
SoftTh works with most DX9 games and while it's down sampling method is not as precise as I would like it to be it's better than down sampling done by chip in LCD.
Do you use VSync or cap FPS?
Well at least according to techreport it was in the works.. I don't know what their sources were though.
It would be nice if AMD could finally match nVidia and render frames smoothly without longer delays.
Then you won't notice a difference if you are maintaining your FPS at that FPS cap.
I honestly don't know who to believe on this subject. Hardware vs. Software doesn't matter AFAIK, the method should largely be the same.
You also have to question this "hardware" idea as that hardware has existed since G80, according to Nvidia. Why then has microstutter only been almost solved with Kepler rather than the 3 generations (and a refresh) before Kepler?
Nvidia's Tom Petersen has stated that their frame metering decreases input lag compared to an unmetered setup in this video ~43 minutes AFAIK.
He explains, through drawing, at 60FPS, that an unmetered setup has between 1-2 frames of latency. A metered setup, since it moves the second frame to the middle, reduces this latency to 1 - 1.5 frames.
If a metered frame starts rendering later than an unmetered frame would, which is what is supposed to happen, this means that input is still received even after the frame from the first card is displayed. This is what causes a reduction in latency. It makes perfect sense.
He also goes on to state that they don't offer an option in the driver to turn frame-metering off since there is no point (advantage) in doing so.
AMD's Robert Hallock, on the other hand, has stated in this thread (I believe your username is Locky in that thread?) that frame pacing adds a slight delay (less than 10ms), but only gives the explanation that:
His argument is that you are adding a slight delay between when the frame is rendered and when it is displayed. I have an issue with this argument for the following reason:
We suppose, in the worst case of microstutter, that both cards are rendering at the same time, as fast as possible, the same scenario. This indeed happens, you'll notice in several articles that (using tomshardware's terminology here) in several games, "Practical" FPS is around half the "Hardware" FPS, implying microstutter worst case scenario.
Establishing a cadence here between when the frame is rendered and when it is displayed will STILL give you a "Practical" FPS equal to around half the "Hardware" FPS since you are now practically showing almost the same frame twice.
So far, I believe Nvidia's explanation.
refresh - refresh - refresh...
uff.... 31 july on Mars on on the Earth?
hurry up AMD, can't wait
i dont know why im waiting i have only a single card...